[ga] Re: Jeff Williams Spams Again

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2002 16:29:01 -0800, William X Walsh wrote:

> That is not spam, not under any ISP's definition.

Yes, it is.  See, for example:

http://email.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.imc.org%2F
ube-def.html

"Unsolicited Bulk Email, or UBE, is Internet mail ("email") that is sent to a
group of recipients who have not requested it. A mail recipient may have at
one time asked a sender for bulk email, but then later asked that sender not
to send any more email or otherwise not have indicated a desire for such
additional mail; hence any bulk email sent after that request was received is
also UBE.

A common term for UBE is "spam", although that term encompasses a wider range
of intrusive transmissions . . . "

http://mail.freeze.com/help/help_spam.php3

Spam is any message or posting, regardless of it's content, that is sent to
multiple recipients who have not specifically requested the mail. Other common
terms for Spam are UCE (Unsolicited Commercial E-mail) and UBE (Unsolicited
Bulk E-mail).

http://mail-abuse.org/standard.html

"(v) A message need not be offensive or commercial in order to fit the
definition of "spam." Content is irrelevent except to the extent necessary to
determine personal applicability, consent, and benefit."

BTW I have "indicated a desire" not to be subject to bulk email from Jeff
Williams.  He has ignored that request making his email unsolicited, unwelcome
and undesirable.  A similar situation (though harder to prove) would arise in
his use of bulk bccs.

> Sheesh, Patrick, have you sunk that low now?
>
> Attempting to get anyone's internet service shut off should be only
> for the most serious offenses, and to be honest, I take a very dim
> view of those who try and use that means to silence people for
> anything less.  I find it a rather despicable form of attack.

You can have any opinion you like just as I can.  The upstream provider can
make their own determination.  Reporting unsolicited bulk email is well within
my rights as an internet user.

> If my opinion of you could have sunk any lower, it would have with
> this attack by you.

That, William, is a personal attack and at least as offensive.  Reporting your
comments to the List Monitors would be likewise within my rights.

You will, no doubt, remember that you have readily made such reports.  I know
this (outside of any official role) because you were kind enough to notify the
list or otherwise advise the person complained about.

As I did in this case, thank you.

On Sun, 6 Jan 2002 16:12:27 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:

> One last thing, wrong action is wrong action, even if it is being used
> against an unpopular person.  And it should never be simply accepted
> because the target is unpopular.  And anyone attempting to that should
> be put down to the same level as their target.

Sending unsolicited bulk email (also known as spam) is the "wrong action".

'Nuff said.

Best regards
Patrick Corliss




--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html